Posted on 03/28/2019 8:50:21 AM PDT by NKP_Vet
The Hall of Fame recently dedicated at New York University was conceived from the Ruhmes Halle in Bavaria. This structure on University Heights, on the Harlem river, in the borough of the Bronx, New York City, has, or is intended to have, a panel of bronze with other mementos for each of one hundred and fifty native-born Americans who have been deceased at least ten years, and who are of great character and fame in authorship, education, science, art, soldiery, statesmanship, philanthropy, or in any worthy undertaking. Fifty names were to have been chosen at once; but, on account of a slight change of plans, only twenty-nine have been chosen, and twenty-one more will be in 1902. The remaining one hundred names are to be chosen during the century, five at the end of each five years. The present judges of names to be honored are one hundred representative American scholars in different callings. They are mostly Northern men, although at least one judge represents each State.
(Excerpt) Read more at abbevilleinstitute.org ...
Let's see. Two rival governments. One says it's not part of the United States. The other says it is. Which one does the United States government recognize as having a role in the determinations of the United States?
Sure, I "get" it, your "cognitive dissonance" is too great to deal with real facts & reasons.
Sweet dreams.
I know you want to pretend that the South was not a huge money stream for the Northern powers, but the truth is that it was.
Just like a Lost Causer. Wave the white flag, then insist that you've won.
"Should not" does not mean "cannot."
Yes, it can be changed for light or transient reasons. It should not be, but it can.
.
Also, Madison may have provided a great deal of input for the US Constitution, but it does in fact mean what the ratifying states believed it to mean. They are the authority from whence the constitution acquires it's legitimacy. Mr Madison is not.
"Consent of the governed." Do you speak it?
Of course, Virginia's actual Confederate legislature didn't approve, but it had already seceded and declared war against the United States, so it had no authority -- zero, zip, nada authority -- over US Constitutional issues.
After the war, the Virginia legislature attempted to revoke it's approval and appealed to the US Supreme Court, which ruled in favor of West Virginia.
So it's been settled law ever since.
The government of the United States completely dismisses any claims that Virginia left the Union. Their official position is that it remained part of the Union. Therefore, the Constitutional requirement that their legislature approve the creation of this new state from their territory is necessary for a Union that obeys constitutional law.
Since the United States government recognizes Constitutional law as applying to the State of Virginia, they were required to follow that same constitutional law in requiring the Virginia legislature to approve this change.
They did not. They made a pretend make believe mountain of bullsh*t to rationalize their deliberate breaking of constitutional law on the matter.
Just like they did with the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments, which could have never passed the actual constitutional amendment process.
What they were doing is selling their more expensive (thanks to protectionism in Washington DC) products to Southerners who did have the European money, and then using that money to buy the European products. It still follows the path of them getting money from the South.
Do you not grasp the difference between Northerners producing $78,217,202 and Southerners producing $198,389,351 in European value?
$198,389,351 is more than $78,217,202. It is 72% of the combined total. The North was only producing 28% of the total, so how were they paying for those goods?
The South was ultimately paying for the bulk of those goods. The numbers are clear on this point.
Bad things tend to happen to you when you pick a fight with the United States.
Exactly. The United States was the entity who should have insisted that Constitutional law applied, instead they took the position that Virginia really had become separate from the Union. By allowing a rump phoney baloney legislature to approve "West" Virginia, they were effectively admitting that greater Virginia really was under a different authority than the US Constitution.
After the war, the Virginia legislature attempted to revoke it's approval and appealed to the US Supreme Court, which ruled in favor of West Virginia.
Crap argument. Victor's justice made all the pretense have the appearance of law, but it was objectively incorrect. In real truth, it was just a kabuki show to put a rubber stamp on previous illegalities because to overturn them would have caused too much upheaval.
Presumably the device you're typing this on came from China. Where did YOU get the Chinese currency to pay for it?
False, as usual.
The numbers for 1860 show $334 million in merchandise exports, plus $67 million in specie exports, for a total of $401 million.
Of that, cotton was roughly half and no other "Southern products" amounted to more than a couple of percent.
In 1861 when cotton was deleted, US exports fell 35%, which was important, but hardly the disaster DiogenesLamp wants us to believe.
By 1864 US tariff revenues had doubled from 1860.
Clearly that is your opinion, and you're entitled to it, but no Founder said that, ever.
But none of them believed what you believe, not one.
Abraham Lincoln picked a fight with them, and he just happened to be running the United States at the time. Apart from that, this "bad things happen" argument is not a substitute for a real argument.
I point out constitutional laws were broken, and you come back with "sh*t happens." Fine. I have no problems with your argument being "We are powerful, so we make the law mean whatever we want it to mean."
That is at least an honest explanation, and as such it's far better than this pretending that Constitutional requirements or the rule of law had anything to do with it.
In fact, I consider this argument to be an admission that I am correct, and so I like it quite a lot.
"Might makes right."
That money stream was the reason they went to war to keep the Southern states from leaving. Had they not done so, the South would have taken over 72% of all European trade right off the bat. New York would have been economically wrecked, and so too would have been Washington DC.
Funny, the very two greatest enemies of the American people today, were the same people the Confederates were fighting over 150 years ago.
And where is the money still going?
Still going to New York and Washington DC.
The South was producing the European trade, and New York and Washington DC was not only controlling it, but greatly profiting from it.
The Virginia Confederate legislature removed itself from the Union and declared war on the United States.
That Virginia legislature didn't seek and didn't have US government approval-authorization.
Another Virginia legislature was elected by Virginia Unionists, was recognized by Congress and approved forming West Virginia.
Once the Confederate legislature rejoined the Union, it attempted to revoke the previous approval of West Virginia, but in appeal to the US Supreme Court, lost their case.
No Virginia legislature since has ever reopened the case.
Said all the founders in the Declaration of Independence. If you have a good grasp of the English language, you understand that "should" does not mean "shall."
Do you grasp the fact that "should" does not mean "shall"?
The document clearly states that people may change their government if they believe the existing one does not serve their interests. It puts NO CONDITIONS on that statement.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.